Loading…
· Private foundation
Michael & Susan Dell Foundation
This foundation accepts unsolicited grant applications.
$163M
Granted FY2024
832
Grants
48
Communities
$50M
Largest
01What you fund
01
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 84% of Michael & Susan Dell Foundation’s grantee dollars go to organizations outside the IRS cause taxonomy (common for large international and research funders), so a chart would be mostly “unclassified” and misrepresent the portfolio.
02beneath the categories
Past the labels — and the year it shifted
Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.
…and in their own words, year by year
2018
see statementstatement pagesstatement page
2019
see statementstatement pages
2020
see statementstatement pages
2021
scholarshipcovidmarched-fishwerodriguezclass pretoria
2022
scholarshipsscholarshipukrainelopezed-finovember farewellrodriguez
2023
scholarshipsscholarshipisraelmartinezspeakergonzalezlopez
Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.
03FY2024 · 832 grants
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k305 grants · $1.4M
- $10k–50k294 grants · $7.2M
- $50k–250k107 grants · $14M
- $250k+126 grants · $141M
$19,270
Median grant
48
States reached
$7.8B
Total assets
Largest grants
- Charter School Growth Fund$50,000,000
- University of Texas at Austin$8,492,618
- Mobile Loaves & Fishes Inc$7,586,321
- United Jewish Appeal$2,500,000
- University of Texas at Austin$2,106,020
- University of Texas at Austin$2,085,748
- Charter School Growth Fund$2,000,000
- Communities Foundation of Texas$1,774,968
- New Leaders Foundation$1,551,429
- Region 4 Education Service Center$1,521,000
- America's Frontier Fund$1,500,000
- Teach For India$1,322,451
- New Schools Venture Fund$1,250,000
- Education Analytics$1,215,000
- The British Asian Trust$1,104,167
02The need
04
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
show:
Your human-services grants (FY21–24, $12.1M) land where the poverty rate runs at 14% — the area typically sits at 10%. 63% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA, United Way ALICE — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
03Your edge
repeat funding
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
88%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$760M · 783 repeat orgs$104M to everyone else
783 repeat relationships — 547 still active in FY2024, 236 since wound down; 128 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Re-uppedFunded once
Organizations
783
348
Total granted
$760M
$77M
Median revenue growth · since first grant
+22%
+25%
Still filing today
41%
41%
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 84% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $27M went to new ones.
RenewedFirst-time
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
EducationHuman ServicesPhilanthropyInternationalHealthCommunity ImprovementOther
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). The earliest year is left-censored: relationships that predate the data read as “new.” Theme is the grantee’s IRS cause.
Backed again, and grew
- UWUnited Way for Greater Austin4× · 2021–2024 · $5.8M · revenue +61%
Communities Foundation of Texas3× · 2022–2024 · $5.2M · revenue +63%- BGBlackbaud Giving Fund4× · 2021–2024 · $4.9M · revenue +1231%
Funded once
- HCHealth Community Supportone grant, 2018 · $35M
- SPSamaritan's Pursegraduatedone grant, 2022 · $2.5M · revenue +134%
- IMInternational Medical Corpsgraduatedone grant, 2022 · $2.0M · revenue +69%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
04Your field
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
1
Washington University
The washington university is a co-educational, nondenominational university with a long and distinguished history of teaching, research and (cont'd on schedule o)
Education
2
Philadelphia University
To improve lives and provide students with exceptional value in 21st century professional education.
Education
3
Washington College
Washington college challenges and inspires emerging citizen leaders to discover lives of purpose and passion.
Education
4
Seattle Pacific University
Seattle Pacific University is a Christian university fully committed to engaging the culture and changing the world by graduating people of competence and character, becoming people of wisdom, and modeling grace-filled community.
Education
5
William Penn University
William penn university provides the opportunity for an educational experience with a focus on leadership, technology, and the quaker principles of simplicity, peace-making, intergrity, community and equality.
Education
6
Southern Methodist University
The Primary mission of the university is education through research and teaching by creating and imparting knowledge that will shape citizens who contribute to their communities and lead professions in a global society.
Education
7
Union University
Union University provides Christ-centered education that promotes excellence and character development in service to church and society.
Education
8
The Colorado College
To transform our students by providing the finest liberal arts education available, taught through the academically rigorous, immersive, and flexible block plan.
Education
9
Concordia University
Concordia university nebraska's mission is to be an excellent academic and christ-centered community equipping men and women for lives of learning, service and leadership in the church and the world. we primarily do this by providing…
Education
10
Claremont Graduate University
A private, independent, nonprofit institution of higher learning that is a high research activity university awarding master's and doctoral degrees within its five schools and three independent departments.
Education
11
Lincoln Memorial University
Lincoln memorial university is a values-based learning community dedicated to providing educational experiences in the liberal arts and professional studies.
Education
12
Friends University
Friends university, a christian university of quaker heritage, equips students to honor god and serve others.
Education
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Schreiner University and the most unlike its peers is Tides Center. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 45 years old; the field is 12. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 26% startups (under 5 years old) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 4% of your money.
Closures · last 5 years
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.5% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
orgs you fund
0.5%3/555
the rest of the field
13%
17,176/136,249
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
05the grantee network
529 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.
18
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
69
Early backer (in before they grew)
523/529
Grantees still filing
405/529
Grew since you first funded
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Other$740,356,347Education$60,582,471Philanthropy$24,691,684International$12,974,955Human Services$12,202,562Public Benefit$7,091,666Community Improvement$5,648,033
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Gates FoundationWA63.3× affinity53 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →
Open a dossier: Gates Foundation · Walton Family Foundation Inc · Carnegie Corporation of New York · National Collegiate Athletic Association · Council of Independent Colleges · Folds of Honor Foundation · The Moody Foundation · New Profit Inc · Austin Community Foundation Inc · Lumina Foundation for Education Inc · Ecmc Foundation · Ernst & Young Foundation
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organisation Michael & Susan Dell Foundation funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
2024
’20’21’22’23’24
- Jewish Vocational Service Inc — 39% of income from government
- Save the Children Federation Inc — 30% of income from government
- International Youth Foundation — 17% of income from government
- Social Finance Inc — 12% of income from government
- Tech Goes Home Incorporated — 10% of income from government
- University of Miami — 5% of income from government
- Education Resource Strategies Inc — 4% of income from government
- University of Massachusetts Lowell — 2% of income from government
- Western Oregon University Development — 1% of income from government
- Achieving the Dream Inc — 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
8get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
typical government reliance, FY20–24
Government income is each org’s traced federal awards (USASpending — grants and contracts) plus state payments (open checkbooks) as a share of its total revenue (IRS Form 990); the self-reported government-grant line (990 line 1e) is carried for cross-check. An association, not a claim that your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not a census; state records exist for 9 states, so a grantee outside them shows no state figure (dimmed) rather than a false zero. Federal award amounts are obligations, which can span years, so a single-year share is indicative. 990 filings lag 12–24 months.
05Through Plinth
Through Plinth
Your grantmaking, live and operational
This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: NextGen Talent Inc.
Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk
Financial management
low risk
~16 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 3 filed years.
Track record & reputation
medium risk
3 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up +51% since.
Legal standing
low risk
US 501(c)(3); EIN 881672567 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.
Governance
Live in Plinth
Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.
Compliance & sanctions
Live in Plinth
OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.
Program capacity
Live in Plinth
Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.
Live · Plinth’s real DD engine
Run the actual assessment on NextGen Talent Inc, cold from public data.
Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.
Post-award monitoring · continuous checks
- On trackFinancial stability— Roughly 16 months of cash on hand.
- On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2025; revenue grew over the period.
- WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 95% of their budget — load-bearing; a dependency Plinth would track.
- Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.
What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.
Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing
Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro
How do I get to Michael & Susan Dell Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Michael & Susan Dell Foundation through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.
Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.
More from the funding graph
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars pass through an intermediary
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
Strange bedfellows
the named clusters of US funding
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home
State money flows
the interactive map of money crossing state lines